tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1295650767242690450.post3224500369555635276..comments2023-02-13T04:32:36.955+01:00Comments on Garvarn's Blog Archive: An E-mail About EvansGarvarnhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02439483509454442149noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1295650767242690450.post-73520484038340919312007-03-17T02:39:00.000+01:002007-03-17T02:39:00.000+01:00Any more blog posts? *waiting*Any more blog posts? *waiting*Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1295650767242690450.post-90298009136770286362007-02-18T20:43:00.000+01:002007-02-18T20:43:00.000+01:00Is it known to what extent TV-producers cheat by l...Is it known to what extent TV-producers cheat by leaking information to their mediums? That would be one reason as to why TV-shows seem more convincing than live seances.<BR/>VitnirVitnirhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01027383649916392820noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1295650767242690450.post-64110265590151652007-02-16T17:38:00.000+01:002007-02-16T17:38:00.000+01:00Hi Anonymous II,I think you're spot on there; ther...Hi Anonymous II,<BR/>I think you're spot on there; there is simply no reason or room for doubt in the "boost" situation. Just remember that my conclusion is pure speculation.<BR/>Take care,<BR/>GarvarnGarvarnhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02439483509454442149noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1295650767242690450.post-7561991214394571622007-02-16T17:03:00.000+01:002007-02-16T17:03:00.000+01:00I think what is most interesting in this is your c...I think what is most interesting in this is your conclusion that it occured to her after the attentionboost on her was gone. If you are going on National TV on something you believe in, you almost "double-assume" that it´s true.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1295650767242690450.post-33582251021218981672007-02-16T07:46:00.000+01:002007-02-16T07:46:00.000+01:00Hi Anonymous,I know it was from a participant beca...Hi Anonymous,<BR/>I know it was from a participant because she included information that verified her participation and a way for me to have it verified. Revealing the information would expose her name and that is not for me to do. Besides, her identity or her change of attitude is not of importance to the point I'm trying to make in the blog.<BR/>Thanks for commenting,<BR/>GarvarnGarvarnhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02439483509454442149noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1295650767242690450.post-78290205745264941462007-02-16T06:50:00.000+01:002007-02-16T06:50:00.000+01:00And how do you know the e-mail really was from one...And how do you know the e-mail really was from one of the participants in the tv-show, and not from someone who wanted to boost your preconvinced prejudices?<BR/><BR/>To be a true sceptic, you need to be sceptic of all the things you hear, even the things you wants to believe.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com